buffaloboyinATL

I agree. It is easy to look like a genius replacing a wide receiver when Peyton is your QB.

Head coach, no. DC, yes. Rex will go back to being a DC for a year or two if he gets fired, or do a year as a broadcaster. actually, as of right now, only 27 people said absolutely yes. I wouldn't classify that as everyone.

No prediction of who gets what, but we WILL have over 200 yards rushing, including at least one big reverse. They've been setting it up for weeks.

I agree, life would be boring if everyone always did what was expected of them. I love when he said you would really help my son out by not playing in this game on Sunday...

On the one incomplete to Watkins, if he doesn't reach back and get a hand on it, it would have been picked. Amazing to watch something like this and see how easily it could have gone the other way. Go Bills!

That is hilarious. Have to say, I've never seen that before. Jedi mind trick? I am not the linebacker you are looking for.

I have NEVER seen a ref proactively alert at WR that he is off sides or in an illegal formation, and if I did, that would piss me off too.

That's kind of my point. Whether this would have been a penalty or not ( it may have been if he kept moving up on the line) the official should not have intervened. They are there to call penalties, not prevent them.

Sorry, I agree completely that the rule should be enforced for the protection of the LS, I meant I don't agree with the league allowing the officials to intervene with a defensive formation prior to the snap. They should wait until the ball is snapped and then blow the play dead.

Regardless of his intent, if he was over center when the ball was snapped, he was in an illegal Defense formation which is a penalty. My argument is that the officials should not be permitted to alert a player to a pending penalty, regardless of the team. Their job is to call the penalties, not to "prevent" them.

Fair enough. I agree that there are other teams that get the benefit of preferential treatment from the Officials, it was just the Pats* that were the beneficiaries last night. I don't really buy the leagues safety concern excuse though, because to that end, allowing the Defense to play with one extra player could be a safety concern for the other team, so it goes back to my question as to whether that gives the official the right to alert the Defense prior to the snap.

Ok, but if a Defense lines up with 12 men on the field and the referee alerts one of them to get off of the field before the ball is snapped, would you be ok with that? It is not a penalty until the ball is snapped but it is not the referees job to point this out.

You don't agree that the referee repositioning a player to avoid a penalty was beneficial to the Pats*? Had he not intervened the result was almost assuredly a penalty for lining up over the long snapper, you don't agree?

If these parameters are true, and I believe they are, why is it not intentional grounding when a QB spikes the ball to stop the clock? Is there an exception in the rule?

Just because something happens with regularity throughout the league ( a point I personally disagree with) doesn't mean this wasn't something that the referee purposely did that specifically benefitted the Pats*. That is exactly what it was. If that is common practice by the league, then why is this penalty ever even called? Again, whether it is common or not, the referees actions directly benefited the Pats* and potentially altered the outcome of the game. That is undeniable.

No, there are other teams in the league that this applies to, the Pats* are just the one we are discussing right now. I am not even saying it is intentional collusion. It is just like Lebron, Kobe and Jordan getting all the calls in basketball. The stars in any sport tend to get preferential treatment from officials whether that is right or wrong.

I am sorry, but a WR checking in with a ref on alignment and an official proactively alerting a player of an illegal formation prior to the snap on the most crucial play of a game are two completely different scenarios. If you are unwilling to accept that the Pats* receive preferential treatment from the officials! you don't watch enough of their games. The pendulum swings their way more often than not on critical calls.

I think the more obvious assistance from the refs was when they physically alerted a Pats* defender that he was lined up illegally over the long snapper on the final field goal attempt! rather than calling the penalty. Blatant and inexcusable favoritism as far as I'm concerned.

I agree and was about to post this as well. The official alerted the player that he was lined up illegally, instead of waiting two seconds and throwing the flag. The officials clearly do a lot to assist the Pats* through their bs calls! but this was blatant and obvious favoritism. Un-f'n-believable.

Come on Jets! Crap

It is the tag line "where curiosity blossoms" that makes this so funny.

That is funny! I always joke that people in Africa grew up thinking Buffalo is a dynasty that won 4 Superbowls in a row.

I am willing to believe it. When you are in our community, you realize the reputation is not neccesarily reality. I am not shocked that someone's attitude towards Buffalo would change once they are there.

Can we throw Dilfer into that comparison, he seems to fit too. That was we get at least one SuperBowl winner.

I'm not even sure Bradford, RG3 or Cousins are the answer for their current teams, so I am not sure any of those 3 would be considered going strong. Cousins would be the most interesting of those 3 in my opinion though.